Anyway, Ralph Bulger's response to Kyle's question was interesting. When asked what would he say to those who say people would take the law into their own hands if his anonymity was lifted, he said "well they shouldn't really do it, but ..."

You have records on Venables? We're not talking about other people. Anyway, I can't be bothered with this line of argument. You've lost the plot again.

I have no need, based on people who are multiple offenders and based on their risk factor

You however made claims Rags, you cannot back up

You then turn this onto me, because you know you are making a poor argument

No worries on that

You claimed that Venables is a risk to children, but you do not base that on his convictions for child porn. You refuse to say what you're basing it on, so you have no argument left. That's fine by me - you're about to wreck the thread anyway.

I have no need, based on people who are multiple offenders and based on their risk factor

You however made claims Rags, you cannot back up

You then turn this onto me, because you know you are making a poor argument

No worries on that

You claimed that Venables is a risk to children, but you do not base that on his convictions for child porn. You refuse to say what you're basing it on, so you have no argument left. That's fine by me - you're about to wreck the thread anyway.

He is a risk to children, based on the fact of his reoffending factors. Like child porn, the fact that was a murderer and has no view to rehabilitate

I have loads left and now you are poorly trying to ruin this thread yourself, as again you have no answer and instead trying to blame me